Sahlu vs State of Haryana

The instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicant-petitioner in case FIR No. 43 dated 11.05.2018

registered under Sections 120-B, 328, 366-A of the IPC, Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 at Police Station Women, Panipat.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner herein was taken into custody in the aforesaid FIR on 12.05.2018. It is submitted that

the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also contended that challan has been presented and statement of the complainant

has been recorded in which she turned hostile and did not support the version of the prosecution and conclusion of trial will take sufficient time,

therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent- State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and complainant, oppose the grant

of regular bail to the petitioner, while submitting that offences alleged against the petitioner are serious in nature, however, she does not dispute the

fact that the challan has been presented and statement of the complainant has been recorded.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Since, the trial is likely to take some time and in view of the facts that that the petitioner herein has been in custody since 12.05.2018 and that challan

has been presented and statement of the complainant has been recorded in which she turned hostile, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the

petitioner behind bars. At this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be

released on regular bail on execution of adequate personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate.